Do335

ah yep I put the destroyed LOD under Objects\Aircraft\ and not in the Tu-2S folder, so the path is correct. Reason is for a dedicated build the destroyed model can be shared among different aircraft same as in eburger's campaign packs or my wings over Korea build or default 3w data, i.e. you got F-100A, F-100A_58, F-100D, F-100C.... like 6 different F-100 versions and no reason to pack 6 same destroyed LOD in the same install. The C-47 is in Expansion pack 2 so for users without it they would have no destroyed LOD then. I think Wrench the wise figured out this one.

update 1.1 with Cocas 3d fixes and Wrench's dmg dds and some ini work.

Nice write up TempestII. What happened to Gleed's 3 skyflashes, none hit yet 1 kill... If it were a mid-air the kill would be credited to weapon "N/A" there. Proximity detonation i guess?..

hmm I'm not sure what u mean... But afaik TK never explained how morale and condition impact AI performance in campaign mode so ur guess is as good as mine i reckon. edit: ah got it, if you use the Min/MaxAIquality in aircraft_data.ini, it overrides Experience= in campaign_data.ini... Like if you set experience=75 while MinAIquality=Regular/maxAIquality=Ace, all the green pilots in the squadron are now regular and the aces are still aces. for a kickass all elite squadron i reckon MinAIquality=Veteran/MaxAIquality=Ace + Experience=100 seems fit. Something to play with to satisfy your own preference I reckon! Apparently i have my korean campaign F-86 squadrons on this setting all along. Whether it fits in light of the test result I'll have to ponder it:D I previously thought min/maxAIquality only affects single missions at best. and yeah campaign is a lot different than single missions, hehe even something trivia as the landing behavior of AI is different. And they do give up prolonged tail chases which was nice to see. other stuff like rtb when fuel hits zero etc. Anyway one of best AI in flight sims there Imo!

Works in campaign mode as well. Replacement pilot 2nd Lt Scott Seaver, as green as they come, 58 skill, 14 experience. As in the single mission test, set [AIData] MinAIQuality=Veteran MaxAIQuality=Ace But also [DogfightNovice] MaxCannonRange=25 OptimalCannonRange=4 MinCannonRange=3 [DogfightGreen] MaxCannonRange=20 OptimalCannonRange=3.5 MinCannonRange=2.5 [DogfightRegular] MaxCannonRange=17.5 OptimalCannonRange=3 MinCannonRange=2 While [DogfightVeteran] MaxCannonRange=1500 OptimalCannonRange=250 MinCannonRange=150 [DogfightAce] MaxCannonRange=1250 OptimalCannonRange=200 MinCannonRange=100 So if he's green, he's not likely to fire his weapons. But if he's an ace/veteran, he will. Mission result: Fired and scored a kill. Statements working. Another test just to verify. Set [AIData] MinAIQuality=Ace MaxAIQuality=Ace So the aircraft is always on Ace setting and not veteran, in case 58 skill is counted as veteran by the game engine. Also set [DogfightNovice] MaxCannonRange=25 OptimalCannonRange=4 MinCannonRange=3 [DogfightGreen] MaxCannonRange=20 OptimalCannonRange=3 MinCannonRange=2 [DogfightRegular] MaxCannonRange=17 OptimalCannonRange=3 MinCannonRange=2 [DogfightVeteran] MaxCannonRange=15 OptimalCannonRange=2 MinCannonRange=1 So for veteran or below, AI wouldn't fire his weapon. I also deleted the digits in the range settings unlike the prev test, in case the values are "integer" and not "float" in the code and numbers with digits fubars the setting. When targeted to a mig, 2Lt Scott opened fire at 800m+. He is an ACE. Stats

Nice one there! seems the new ones are encrypted. I'll see if my old installer gives ascii text dlls.

updated it duh. Will keep at it if new stuff goes out.

OK tested and the statements work as intended. I used Mig-15 and Mig-15bis 8v8 as a test base and MaxCannonRange, OptimalCannonRange, and MinCannonRange as an identifier. For the mig-15bis set [AIData] MinAIQuality=Veteran MaxAIQuality=Ace While for both Mig-15 and -15bis, set extremely short cannon fire ranges for veteran and ace as: [DogfightVeteran] MaxCannonRange=150 OptimalCannonRange=25 MinCannonRange=15 [DogfightAce] MaxCannonRange=125 OptimalCannonRange=20 MinCannonRange=10 Further gave [DogfightNovice] [DogfightGreen] [DogfightRegular] CannonFireAngle=40 So what would this mean is if the AI is really on Veteran or Ace, it would rarely fire its cannons if at all, due to the extremely short capped range. But if the AI is at regular or lower, it would fire its cannon quite a lot and extremely inaccurately. In mission editor I set both the Mig-15Bis and Mig-15 skill level to Poor. I hop into a singleton 3rd flight as observer and do not enter detection range of red AI flight. The result is among 8 Mig-15bis only 1 Mig-15bis fired its cannon for a single burst, proving that they are indeed on Veteran or Ace level, despite Poor rating given, so Min/MaxAIQuality is indeed working there. For the 8 Mig-15, they fired a lot and all ran outta ammo. So they are Regular or below as given by skill level Poor, and not affected by Min/MaxAIQuality in the -15bis' Data ini. Resolved for me. But next step: take the rookie pilot in my campaign for a test mission with above statements, to see if he's just a plain rookie or Ace in disguise! Remaining question for the old guys: where are these statements dig up? Older versions? First Eagles? DLLs? They certainly are not in any default SF2 data.

My 50 bucks is still on standby :diablo:

uhm.... I don't think putting it in one aircraft type will affect another type. That just defies logic. Unless proper testing is done to prove it. "I feel I'm shot down a lot more" is totally subjective. But if it's true I reckon it's best to leave it alone, for it surely would upset balance especially in campaign mode which I care about.

Adding to the confusion... I've had doubts about if the statements actually do work or it's just some placebo effect. I just left them there since reckon there's no harm. But will probably give it a test later.

Pilot cam

The list is not that important but rather an example of what their focus is, I've been heavily involved since 2005 and read a lotta stuff so for some you gotta know where they come from. It is still an awesome game I think most oughtta try it if haven't. Just no longer for me as I think it could be better.

To the usual ppl it for sure is. But if one looks deeper the differences in campaign mode are big. The acclaimed ability to move ground units, even the old ability to manual control ATO, was a much more tedious process compared to allied force. The gist I got was the guy who did this didn't do it outta interest but someone else kept asking him again and again. Can I find my flight in the ATO via a couple mouse clicks and not sift through the sea of package numbers; can i move my ground units with a simple double click and drag; do runways/features magically repair themselves in a few hours and do engineers accelerate repairs; can you hop into a flight that is in egress mode; can player assign runway targets in OCA strike and do AI line up for the bomb drop; is the AI aggressive especially in WVR and not go dumb; are SHORAD/manpad launchers as deadly and not hesitant in engaging overflying flights; do cargo planes actually land; do u get a nice UI notice that your squadron has moved airbase; are the firefights between aggregated 2D ground units visually depicted in 3d; do AI F-16s actually launch their sta. 4/6 weapons after firing off 3/7; do missiles other than AIM120s have refined FMs other than their old SP3 placeholders; do long range IR missiles actually have command guidance; are chaff chance matrix against ARH missiles fubar; I could go on and on. UI control, AI, database, diversity, gameplay elements that make a campaign ala a computer game great. Despite "we are all mighty", BMS is the "avionics Falcon", you for sure can pick different versions and configure their avionics and 'twas old 2011 news but "Campaign falcon" is and likely always will be, Allied force. One can trace this back to Viperops (-->Lead pursuit) and BMS split in the superpak days. This dev priority difference was one of their disagreements. The difference is also clear on the forums. The old AF frugalsworld forums was pretty packed with campaign play threads while the talk on BMS is avionics, gameplay wise. That there is another good indication. For the end user, ofc, this is 2016, you got no better choice. But say my PC isn't that great and I can just run AF. I say hey that there's a blessing in disguise. Actually own plan was to port the BMS hi def .LODs, skins and better FM like topolo's Mig-29 and F-15 back to AF and have fun with them campaigns, after done with SF2 modding. As for that commercial sim don't have a high regard for it myself and not gonna bother with it, it is certainly funny to watch bitchiness that is side effect of consumerism get hold of many.

^aah. What does BMS have that DCS doesn't? DYNAMIC CAMPAIGN. But they don't care much, don't know much and isn't much interested in the campaign side of things, instead mostly focuses on avionics which is their main interest. When i had access to/bothered with the dev foras it was the gist I got. 'twas a shame I reckon. This is a computer game, not a simulator built for air force personnel. But they're pushing it towards the latter, much like DCS. (Ppl tend to think computer games are.. crappier than air force simulators. But they are not, they just have different focuses.) F4AF however IS the campaign Falcon, with very good DC, very robust AI, and solid database. I could fly it for 2 days straight sustained only by takeouts and movie breaks on singleplayer:) Older graphics, older avionics and its makers' cease & decease letter to BMS notwithstanding!...

**tis below is just a blog/diary thing** Have tuned the sabre FM aeros more and I'm quite satisfied after some 35 different versions and seeing white stars in me eyes for days:X DTIC and NASA reports have some good info so thanks to google, the American taxpayers, and the college interns that digitized them. (But hopefully the progress is not jinxed by typing it out.....) Most apparent changes i guess is pitch sensitivity tuned down on all versions especially on the F mostly by lengthening the chord according to RL numbers. It was needed because the tail unit deflection angles on the real jet are much larger than anticipated. Initially I thought it was for sure gonna affect gunnery but apparently it helps improving hit rate by providing a much more stable pipper. Only down side is hand is a bit sore after 1 or 3 flights.:D Second most apparent is slat opening speed reduced on the slat wing versions. Again I thought it was gonna affect turn rate but apparently it improved energy retention by delaying slat opening so worked out well. Then ran some AI vs AI 4v4/8v8 tests between various jets, one thing that simply doesn't do is the F-10 pwns F-30 everytime. AI fights at mach .4 - .6, more .4 as the fight progresses and the slats on the F-10 helps it. The F-30 doesn't even have the upper hand against Migs while even the E-10s do. Tried giving it some vortex highlift devices but it just felt too unhistorical. Lastly the solution was to assign StallDrag=0 so the F-30 gets better energy retention past AlphaStall, higher lift increase at mach .5 and .6, and a higher CLmax. Vortex highlift remains Cmdc only as before but decided by AoA to improve high alpha handling. Luckily the Mig still have the upper hand in climb and accel despite the F-30 getting better L/D ratio at higher mach so this nail biting thing was settled. Per subsonic aerodynamics the early jets suffer max CL decrease approaching the mach. Likely critical AoAs are reduced. None of the stock FMs model this. Per real life info the slats on the early wings do not open past mach .65 and yet again the FM engine is unable to model it. And so it made it almost impossible to model the advantages of the 6-3 wing properly. The current solution is I reckon the best compromise. But well don't think it's too bad. On to more campaign testing or atm why can't I get replacement pilots and why all the shot down pilots are POW now after I've changed a few strategic nodes and given the frontlines better resolution???

It is nice that you've come to this conclusion but ppl used to call it lame falcon. But hey I completely agree with your conclusion. I was also a master of LodEditor ;;) BMS is just a DCS wanna be deep down nowadays <-- entirely my personal opinion. (/me whistles)

Don't mess with LE rather... Yes it can edit 3d models but also FU installs. Janhas builds auto installer nowadays. The stock skins are decent enough imo, AF aint a game for eye candies anyway.